Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

jorijn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 380 posts

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#171

Post by locknitpicker »

dylan604 wrote: post #169
locknitpicker wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (...) I'm also remembering how GitHub used "all open repositories" to train their first Copilot without telling anyone. This is a silly opinion to hold, isn't it? I mean, you release projects under a license with the express purpose of freely distributing your code among anyone in the world that may have any interest whatsoever, and even allow they themselves to share it with anyone they feel fit. But you are someh…

Because there's no way the code is distributed properly according to any of the OSS licenses. In fact, it claims authorship with nonsense bylines saying the LLM wrote it.

> Because there's no way the code is distributed properly according to any of the OSS licenses.

What are you talking about? There is no distribution, only read access.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#172

Post by lelanthran »

thisislife2 wrote: post #165
bayindirh wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I'm not forgetting the spirit of what Git is, I'm also remembering how GitHub used "all open repositories" to train their first Copilot without telling anyone. So, no thanks. I'll not be committing any personal code there anymore. And no, I don't care for the social aspects either. Discoverability, stars, and AI bot powered issue bombardment. I'm fine like this. Also, remember, "Open Source is not about You".

I completely share your sentiment about feeling irked about open source code being used to train commercial AI models. However, I think the battle is already lost - the nature of copyright and open source code philosophy (currently) means that there isn't any real way of preventing your code being used to train AI. Look at the legal precedents being set in courts where many of the BigTechs have actually pirated copyr…

> However, I think the battle is already lost - the nature of copyright and open source code philosophy (currently) means that there isn't any real way of preventing your code being used to train AI.

Laws should make it a double-edged sword, make distillation explicitly legal.

Not much else they can do.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#173

Post by nickzelei »

epicide wrote: post #63
nottorp wrote: post #62

What if you don't want to self host? Who offers low feature git hosting for a small price? Something like the old $7 account before github was bought by MS? All I want is hosting and a read only web interface, plus access control in case I have collaborators. All the offerings are enterprise priced because they offer "minutes of CI", "AI assistants" and other icing on the cake.

SourceHut sounds very close to what you describe: https://sr.ht/

I’ve had my eye on this platform. Generally like their design and ethos too. However I find their code viewer/navigation a little hard for my eye. But maybe I’m just too used to GitHub.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#174

Post by marcosdumay »

MrFurious wrote: post #13
gchamonlive wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but GitHub is more than just git. The most important aspect of the platform that everybody seems to forget is the social component and how easy it made to create a persistent, off-site repository and collaborate across repos.

The "social component" is a big problem in actual FOSS.

Yes, what's one more reason to abandon the largest platform.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#175

Post by Daviey »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #2

Everyone seems to be leaving GitHub, and forgetting the entire spirit of what git is in my eyes. Git was always meant to be decentralized, the problem here is that all the tooling around git was centralized to GitHub because it was a cleaner experience, they scaled nicely, and were properly maintained. I would prefer to still see mirrors on GitHub that are auto-synched because I've seen projects for years either self…

This was the original model of launchpad.net, it was supposed to be a hub of Foss that pulled in from the decentralised VCS's, and provide them all via bzr.

But bzr lost the battle, Canonical was slow to adopt Git, lack of investment in the platform, so it was another lunch that got taken from them.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#176

Post by lelanthran »

locknitpicker wrote: post #168
bayindirh wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I'm not forgetting the spirit of what Git is, I'm also remembering how GitHub used "all open repositories" to train their first Copilot without telling anyone. So, no thanks. I'll not be committing any personal code there anymore. And no, I don't care for the social aspects either. Discoverability, stars, and AI bot powered issue bombardment. I'm fine like this. Also, remember, "Open Source is not about You".

> (...) I'm also remembering how GitHub used "all open repositories" to train their first Copilot without telling anyone. This is a silly opinion to hold, isn't it? I mean, you release projects under a license with the express purpose of freely distributing your code among anyone in the world that may have any interest whatsoever, and even allow they themselves to share it with anyone they feel fit. But you are someh…

> This is a silly opinion to hold, isn't it? I mean, you release projects under a license with the express purpose of freely distributing your code among anyone in the world that may have any interest whatsoever, and even allow they themselves to share it with anyone they feel fit. But you are somehow outraged if people actually use said code?

You're making things up: the outrage is not that people used it, it's that the licence requires attribution at least, and opening the derivative product at worst. Token providers that trained on open source did neither.

> Please make it make sense.

I am skeptical that you didn't know the reason for the outrage because it's been repeated in every single thread where this was discussed.

I myself repeated it multiple times each time this feigned confusion you display appears.

Like I am doing now, yet again.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#178

Post by hackthemack »

chungy wrote: post #123

Consider Fossil[1], which packages the entire repository state—code history, wiki, tickets, forum—into a single file, and that state gets cloned. When/if you need to change hosting providers, you get to lose zero data in Fossil because of it. [1] https://fossil-scm.org/

I love fossil. Something about it's opinionated workflow that matches what I think. But

network effects. I just can not bring my team to use fossil. They have to share code with others. Other departments. And everyone (99%+) uses git. It just feels like a disservice to force them to use fossil. It is a catch-22.

It is similar to so many other things in the tech space. Trying to get fellow developers to use functional style idioms. Trying to enforce immutability. It is like something big (like a facebook or google project) has to force the community to get on board.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#179

Post by lelanthran »

trueno wrote: post #140
Ritewut wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason will be that not everyone wants to deal wit maintaining a self-hosted box.

my eyes have been glazing over it feels like our infra/devops dudes have proverbially given up and they're just looking to buy cloud services to do everything now. security guy looks like he wants to jump off a bridge and i keep trying to nudge them into waking up to not needing 99.9% uptime we'll settle with 95% uptime and no one needs to be on call, and you can go to sleep at night knowing all the code lives behind…

What would you use a cluster of mac minis for?

I mean, if you're going that far, a couple of refurbished servers gives you far more compute and far more capacity and much better maintainability.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#180

Post by chris_money202 »

chrischen wrote: post #149
bayindirh wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I'm not forgetting the spirit of what Git is, I'm also remembering how GitHub used "all open repositories" to train their first Copilot without telling anyone. So, no thanks. I'll not be committing any personal code there anymore. And no, I don't care for the social aspects either. Discoverability, stars, and AI bot powered issue bombardment. I'm fine like this. Also, remember, "Open Source is not about You".

What exactly did they train? Copilot is powered by claude, gemini, or ChatGPT these days. Did they train autocomplete? I mean the code is open source so anyone can scrape it and train it too. I'm kind of glad they did train it because otherwise we'd still be stuck with Apple level AI models right now. The whole reason we have so many models, including open weight models, that are all competitive with each other is be…

Yeah have to agree here, Github Copilot itself doesn't have any first party models they use the frontiers. So, they didn't "train" using public repos but they probably allowed (or didn't prevent) the frontiers from pulling the repos along with the rest of the internet when creating their models.
Post reply on HN